Hammond v Kelky Pty Ltd t/as Tattersalls Hotel Gilgandra [2013] NSWADT 4

Hammond v Kelky Pty Ltd t/as Tattersalls Hotel Gilgandra [2013] NSWADT 4

The Tribunal found that refusal of service was not on the ground of Ms Hammond's race but was due to a bona fide case of mistaken identity. There was no differential treatment nor causation established linking the refusal to race, and thus no contravention of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 was made out.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Dulcie Alisia Hammond; Respondent: Kelky Pty Ltd t/as Tattersalls Hotel Gilgandra
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act 1977 / Final Decision
Outcome
The complaint is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Provision of Goods and Services, Mistaken Identity, Equal Opportunity
Anti Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Provision of Goods and Services Mistaken Identity Equal Opportunity

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dulcie Alisia Hammond

Applicant

Kelky Pty Ltd t/as Tattersalls Hotel Gilgandra

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Complaint Under Anti Discrimination Act 1977 / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal of service was on the ground of race
  2. 2 Whether differential treatment and causation elements of race discrimination established

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that refusal of service was not on the ground of Ms Hammond's race but was due to a bona fide case of mistaken identity. There was no differential treatment nor causation established linking the refusal to race, and thus no contravention of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 was made out.

Court Disposition

The complaint is dismissed.

Orders

  • The complaint is dismissed.